Showing results 1-1 of 1.
Cases using phrasing similar to:
"As noted by Professor Giannelli, supra, at 1235 (footnotes omitted): "The probative value of scientific evidence,..., is connected inextricably to its reliability; if the technique is not reliable, evidence derived from the technique is not relevant.""
Hawthorne II, following Ibn-Tamas I, which in turn followed Dyas v. United States, 376 A.2d 827 (D.C.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 973, 98 S.Ct. 529, 54 L.Ed.2d 464 (1977), applied a three-fold test for determining the admissibility of expert testimony relating to the subject of the battered woman syndrome: (1) Whether the expert is qualified to give an opinion on the subject matter; (2) whether the state of the art of scientific knowledge permits a reasonable opinion to be given by the expert; and (3) whether the subject matter of the expert opinion is so related to some science, profession, business or occupation as to be beyond the understanding of the average layman. ... The court's decision to disallow Dr. Walker's testimony was the same as that reached by the trial court after remand in Ibn-Tamas v. United States, 455 A.2d 893 779*779 (D.C. 1983) (Ibn-Tamas II). Ibn-Tamas II upheld, as a proper exercise of the trial court's discretion, the conclusion "`that defendant failed to establish a general acceptance by the expert's colleagues of the methodology used in the expert's study of battered women.'"